Cameron Patrick wrote:
Nope, no fall-through in that one, so it doesn't help. It /is/ nifty
though :-)
Uh, there was a fall through there. Notice that if x has a value that
isn't in the dictionary the if will fall through to the else.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest,
Julian Mehnle wrote:
I call that readable, but I guess somebody won't. ;-)
Actually it is quite readable and sensible in that it breaks down the
regex into parts that a human can read. Oh, and the equivolant would be legal
in Python. Which was kind of my point on asking H.S. the two
Isaac To wrote:
E.g., it is more difficult to
cut some code in one function and paste it into another. So for best
results one really have to use an editor (and perhaps other tools) that
knows about such significant whitespaces.
Not really if one is wanting to maintain proper indention in
H. S. Teoh wrote:
Yeah, 'whitespace' about sums up the value of it. Except to Python
programmers, of course. :-P :-P
Quite the contrary. First off generally flames are from the uninformed.
Since in most cases the evils of whitespace are spouted off by those who
have never once touched
Tom wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 11:04:48AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
*It looks like multi-line method invocations require parenthesis to be
indented at the paren level. Sometimes that's useful, but often I like
to pack arguments tighter than that and indent only once on subsequent
lines
H. S. Teoh wrote:
Not for any non-trivial task, although I did try to learn it some time
ago. Recently, I had the chance to take another look at it; however, I
found Ruby, which seemed to have the best of both Perl and Python plus
true object-orientation. So when I move on from Perl (which I love,
Cameron Patrick wrote:
I don't think it is. Python doesn't have a switch/case equivalent. It'd
have to be done with a bunch of if's or something.
Well, depends. Do you consider its dictionary to be a switch?
def foo():
... print foolio
...
def bar():
... print bario
...
baz =
H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:29:52PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:19:02PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Also, as an off-topic note, blank lines that contain tabs or spaces
are Pure Evil(tm), especially in code. One of these days I should
write a sed script to
H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 11:47:34AM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
[snip]
I have a love-hate relationship with the significant whitespace.
I have a hate-hate relationship with it. I much prefer free-style syntax
where the programmer is allowed to use his best judgment on how to
Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I strongly reccomend Perl. Why? Well, that's how I learnt (or more
properly, how I picked up after years of inactivity) programming (I
had only BASIC experience before that). Perl is a language meant to be
easy to write - Yes, your first code will probably not be very
David Palmer wrote:
(2) Perl or Python. This seems to be another divided camp.
What are the capabilities of each? What are the applications of each?
Python and Perl have basically the same capabilities and applications as
the other. The major difference is Python doesn't look like warm-over
One of these days I'll also learn how to proofread before I hit send...
Steve Lamb wrote:
decade of Wordstar-esque editors ending with joe. I have vi. I love
Hate, not have.
mode when you want to be in command mode. When in edit mode ESC costs
you nothing. It doesn't change modes
Tom wrote:
Significant whitespace? Shudder, that brings back crusty old memories
of Fortran. I have great fondness for fortran because of the wonderful
mathematical algorithms in LinPack, but I have no fondness for
significant whitespace.
And? Does Fortran's rules map to Pythons? I
H. S. Teoh wrote:
That doesn't negate the fact that I find significant whitespace rather
atrocious. I really rather use a language where I'm free to format the
code the way I want it, to maximally convey its meaning, rather than to be
forced to write it a certain way because some genius decided
Tom wrote:
Do whitespace mistakes cause compile time errors? The frustrating thing
about fortran was variable names that started with C could be
interpreted as comments not indented correctly, which would just cause
that line to be skipped. Integer literals not indented correctly could
be
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:17:45 +0200
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Runs spamc twice. Usually it won't matter, but with higher traffic, the load
will increase for obvious reasons...
spamc isn't run twice. exiscan-acl *can* run the mail through SA as a
test. It doesn't /have/ to. So
You are aware Mutt is perfectly capable of responding to the list. Learn
it, love it, USE IT!
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:20:46 -0500
Gunnar Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Lamb dijo [Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 07:21:05PM -0700]:
Gunnar Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] http://www.ietf.org
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:39:02 -0400
H. S. Teoh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:46:15PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Except it never hits SA nor do I even have procmail installed. Can't
stand the ugly beast.
It never hits SA? Almost all Swen mails I got were caught by my
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:45:55 +0200
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For now I'm using the SA-Exim method because even though it's clumsy (needs
the .so file compiled from source so distribution isn't as trivial as an
apt-get invocation), I used it before the Exiscan patch was available and
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:07:46 +0200
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:43:30AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Same here though I am sticking with SA-Exim because it saves the mail
in a certain range so I can throw it at the Bayesian classifier.
I usually don't
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:34:58 -0400
H. S. Teoh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've resorted to blocking port 25 to subnets from which these spams
What would help is to be able to block an IP once it's been hit. Thing is
I cannot for the life of me figure out a way to do it. Here's the first 25
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:48:58 -0500
Gunnar Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0821.txt
And what does RFC2821 have to say about it?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 22:44:50 -0400
H. S. Teoh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another major source is rr.com, which not only gives me tons of Swen, but
also other spam in general. I've blacklisted rr.com in /etc/hosts.deny,
but obviously I'm missing something obvious, 'cos rr.com spam still gets
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 07:49:36 +0100
It's the same sort of thinking that's causing no end of trouble for people
trying to communicate with AOL users:
http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=96264
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/03/04/13/2215207.shtml?tid=120
I've got
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 12:50:51 +0200
Julian Mehnle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, you can't make such a general statement that using content-based filters
is better than using DNS RBLs. It wholly depends on the listing policy of
the RBL, and in most cases, content-based filters will be the far
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 15:40:15 +1000
Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:04:39AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
I'm coming to the view that we're approaching the era where all mail is
going to have to be subject to filtering, at the MTA level.
Depends on how
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 23:49:40 +
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. The modular design of SMTP agents like postfix do not allow
scanning of messages before the message has been accepted by the
MTA at the SMTP session. I think you would have to add hooks
into smtpd, but that is going to
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:31:59 +
benfoley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 29 August 2003 09:28, Steve Lamb wrote:
Oddly enough Spamassassin doesn't exasperate the problem. TDMA does.
exacerbate is probably what you meant here.
Quite so. 1:30am emails before the requisite
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:36:57 -0700
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, since we're pointing fingers, it's really SMTP that's broken by
design, and all anti-spam programs (including C-R systems) are merely
stopgap measures that try to make up for SMTP's shortcomings.
Oddly enough
Just some additional data points as I have been following this and other
related C-R threads for a while now.
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:35:25 +0100
Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
[ Snip ]
Specific to my own experience: over half the C-R challenges (TMDA or
otherwise) I've
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:44:34 +0100
Stephen Stafford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, but I do NOT see how this is a grave bug. It's wishlist (at best).
I tend to agree with the grave aspect.
YOU might not agree that C-R systems are good (personally I detest them),
but that does NOT mean
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 07:32:43 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Somebody ITP-ed cpufreq a little time ago. That's quite important if
you are using a laptop (which a lot of DDs are) with ACPI and you
don't want to burn all your battery.
New tools get written all the time, many to
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:04:04 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Steve Lamb
(please trim your lines a little, 72 chars/line is considered
standard, to allow for a few levels of quoting before breaking the
lines on a 80 char wide terminal. TIA.)
Please use a standard quote
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:52:14 +0200
Matthias Urlichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OTOH, most editors can be configured as to which characters they consider
to be quotes.
True, but reflow across multiple levels tends to break when one has
different quote characters to contend with.
--
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 09:06:56 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it can if you use | or : or some other random character as well.
It's still a bit silly to have to reflow all your paragraphs at the
first quotation level, but whatever.
Which I don't. Since the quoted text is
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 08:29:54 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, you have misconstrued it the other way. It really was You
like it therefore you should contribute.
No. There is a difference between these two statements:
I like Debian therefore I should contribute.
I
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 09:33:24 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bullshit. Our community consists of heckling each other until we get
it right. Membership is about doing the damn work; I guess that's a
form of resources.
heckle
But I thought it was perfectly possible to perform work
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 17:59:52 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 10:32:07AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
Start with the things about Debian which are distinctly different from
other projects. You should be able to find some things which you want
to do which depend
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 23:39:25 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Two pounds of flax.
Oh, you play A Tale in the Desert?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:27:01 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know the laws where you come from, but in .no, I think this
would be very illegal. Also, you don't want to archive everything
that passes through a mail server, that'll just give you a huge bunch
of
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:23:17 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:27:00AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
Because you think it's an awesome group with laudable goals and you
want to contribute?
TBH, that's a lousy reason to join Debian. Send a cheque or
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 20:23:48 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:06:39PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:23:17 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:27:00AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
Because
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:23:20 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course that isn't true, I was just showing the farce of your
statement. Obviously you want people who like the project to contribute.
You have failed miserably at understanding my statement. I do not want
people
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:29:03 -0700
Craig Dickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew said that merely liking Debian wasn't a good enough reason to
want to join the project.
No, he said it wasn't a good reason. No enough.
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBH, that's a lousy reason to join Debian.
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:49:28 -0500
Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:10:01PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
I've always thought KDE a wonderful example of what happens when you
give commit access to just about anybody too.
Scott
(GNOME user)
Oh you
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:25:41 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I *do not* want people to contribute *because* they like the
project.
What other reason would their be? Why would they want to contribute to a
project they don't like esp. when there is no financial gain for it?
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:08:38 +0100
Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anybody who has to ask Why should I/we/they contribute? is not
suitable for Debian.
Oddly enough, I've never asked that.
(The answer, incidentally, is because we can
or because it's there, or some other variation;
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 09:35:29 +0200
Matthias Urlichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send
off the mail, your MUA says Sent, you power down or just close the
laptop, and, if your smarthost happens to be a bit slow today, the mail
sits
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:34:49 +0200
Michael Piefel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 6.08.03 um 13:04:41 schrieb Emile van Bergen:
Neither tab-completion or globbing is available when I'm editing a file
and have to write those path names.
In Vim insert mode, press ^X^F for completion, ^N/^P to
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
Bernhard R. Link [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If mutt spoke SMTP, it would be a MTA itself. (Perhaps still missing
the proper interface to link /usr/lib/sendmail to mutt, but that would
be the lesser part).
No, it would not. It would be using another method
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:07:40 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not if the projects have different goals.
If the goal is the same only the process to that goal is broken then it is
a waste of time and effort.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink,
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:30:11 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see your name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php. What part of the
process are you claiming is broken?
I wasn't aware my name had to be on the list to recognize that some have
been there for years.
--
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:27:10 -0500
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And is a much better choice than expecting every user to locally
configure smtp settings in the MUA. Lack of direct-SMTP support in mutt
is a good thing.
Yeah because entering smtp.isp.com is just so trying for most
I do not need CCs. I am obviously active on the list.
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 23:28:52 +0800
Cameron Patrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:04:00AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
It is if they have to dig up what the correct SMTP server is. Or if
they're on a laptop whose
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:26:12 -0500
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(IMO, the kernel ignoring $(CC) is the kernel's problem.)
One problem doesn't excuse the other.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:48:29 -0600
Hans Fugal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
New mutt users might be slightly confused by the mutt way of doing
things but that doesn't mean we have to patch mutt for their sakes.
Naturally, it's up to the package maintainer how to differ from
upstream, but this mutt
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:50:21 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Steve Lamb
| How many local users are you going to have on a laptop whose correct
SMTP| server changes as a function of their location?
Usually: one, I guess.
So 1 person, 1 location to change
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:56:20 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:01:55AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:30:11 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see your name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php. What part
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:36:45 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Branden Robinson wrote:
(IMO, the kernel ignoring $(CC) is the kernel's problem.)
Don't you know your O doesn't matter, only Steve's?
This isn't a matter of opinion. Simple test. When you
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:09:15 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Steve Lamb wrote:
Actually, I think it does. They should either be accepted or rejected
within x days. x being somewhere below rand(20) * 365. Either they are
in, rejected
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:11:47 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I never said their status was unjust. I said the process appears
broken. Two completely different statements. I cannot think of any
conceivable justification for ANY application to be present for years.
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 12:13:41 -0600
Hans Fugal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would alter the way my mail is sent.
Are you sure? I see nothing in the patch that would require the use of
SMTP. The verbage always says allow. I do not see the code for using the
local MTA removed at all.
--
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:00:38 -0500
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, that's the admin's job to configure. If the user and the
admin are one and the same, why does it matter if the configuration is
done in a local or a global config file? (sudo dpkg-reconfigure ...)
And if the
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:50:36 +0100
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
About the same as finding a sponsor, then, with about the same ease of
maintenance afterwards (i.e. you still have to run your changes past
someone, not upload them directly).
Except when your sponsor goes AWOL for 3
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:29:30 +0100
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thus, while the situation isn't optimal, I can't see a better way.
Thank you. In the past 3 days you're the first person to actually explain
why things are contrary to how every other package is instead of trying to
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 21:34:26 +0200
Matthias Urlichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So how can we get it into your head that the other is _not_ a problem?
By explaining why gcc 3.3 is needed for gcc 2.95 to work in the first
place! Is that too much to ask? Apparently! Lemme put it this way: In
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:22:51 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it is too much to ask, because it is impossible to explain the reason
for something which isn't so. gcc 2.95 doesn't require gcc 3.3, it just
requires some version of the 'gcc' package with a version number =
On 06 Aug 2003 16:27:24 -0500
Joe Wreschnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a problem, but it's a problem every large project and many small
ones have, not just Debian. Claiming that Debian is dying because of it
is absurd.
I never claimed Debian is dying and if I were it would be for a
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:06:53 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You haven't listened.
You've not said anything worth listening to.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:26:06 -0500 (CDT)
Adam Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you ever heard of alternatives? If 2 packages are installed, both
providing the same alternative, it's up to you to decide which is used.
Yes, I have. I've used it quite a bit.
I'm not saying that
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:45:44 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:39:42PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:06:53 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You haven't listened.
You've not said anything worth listening to.
*plonk
On 06 Aug 2003 16:48:18 -0500
Joe Wreschnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let them go. IMO it's far better to install more than is necessary, but
always get the desired functionality, than install less than is desired,
and then have to spend 20 hours recompiling for the necessary
functionality.
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:37:32 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What you meant to do was to run make CC=gcc-2.95 instead of make. There
is no need to futz around with the default gcc version; just ask for what
you want.
Uh, no. I am aware of that. That, however, did not
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:14:08 -0700
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh, no. I am aware of that. That, however, did not prevent it from
running the wrong GCC. v2.4.21 of the kernel had a problem with 3.3.
Correction, 2.4.20. For some reason 2.4.21 seems to be crashing my system
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 00:25:27 -0400
Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I fail to see how 2.95 installing both 3.3 and 2.95 somehow equates to
a problem!
A failed kernel compile when trying to bring stability to a machine
constitutes as a problem in my book.
I build kernels with
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 08:56:50 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I know that's 2.4.21, but I'm not going to unpack a whole 2.4.20 tree
to demonstrate that it works the same way. It does.
I never said it didn't work. What I said was that when I did it 2.4.20
had the same
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:25:38 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then perhaps this particular problem was not with gcc 3.3. I think some
additional investigation would be prudent before any talk about grave bugs.
Which is why I asked here first before just filing.
--
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:33:53 -0400
Please stop crusading, and find out what your kernel build actually
did. Because it works just fine for all the rest of us.
Who's crusading? I am pointing out what I see as an apparent problem for
discussion. Crusading would be to file the damned bug
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 10:54:38 -0400
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't compile your kernel with gcc 3.3. I don't know whether the bugs lie
in the kernel or in gcc (or both), but this combination does not work
correctly.
Yeah. That was the whole reason I was trying to get a copy
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 08:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that, if for some reason the user knew about the command
apropos, even that wouldn't help him -- none of dselect, aptitude,
and apt-get come up for apropos install or apropos setup.
I do believe they are
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:06:26 -0400
H. S. Teoh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you check your compile logs to see if it actually compiled with
gcc-2.95 or with just gcc (==3.3) ? It happened to me several times that
when building 2.4.21, it would use gcc-2.95 for the initial configuration
and
Adam, where does it say anywhere in my sig or headers that I want a CC? I
read the list just fine, you can reply to the list and only the list just
fine. I don't appreciate replying to what I think is a private message only
to see a copy of it in the public area and have to resend the
Oh, look, someone else who CCs when it is obvious the person they're
responding to is participating right here.
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Steve Lamb wrote:
What manual?
I rest my case.
I receieved the machine
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:38:19 +0200
Emile van Bergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apple has a great way of doing that. They don't dumb down, they don't
belittle you, they assume an intelligent being who can grasp reasonably
complex English sentences, but who has less knowledge of computer
idiom.
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 22:16:37 +0200
Emile van Bergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would even scream at
/Variable Data/
simply because it encourages slow and RSI-inducing click and drag
behaviour, because such path names are impossible to type in (and this
one even requires escaping the space
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:42:43 +0200
Artur R. Czechowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to know Md's opinion, but for me there are no reasons to relax
dependencies for mutt (and other MUA). I would not like to do it without
policy requirements because it concerns also other MUA's.
But
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:16:43 -0400
H. S. Teoh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Downgrading sounds like overkill in this situation. I only had to edit
/usr/src/linux/Makefile to change HOSTCC to gcc-2.95 and export
CC=gcc-2.95 in the environment, and it worked fine for me. This is on
2.4.21, of course,
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:30:11 +0100
Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hixie's pretty well-known in certain other free software circles. What
I've seen of him elsewhere implies to me that he isn't incompetent in
the least, and frankly I think you're going way overboard in the
hostility of
Package: gcc-2.95
Depends: gcc (= 1:2.95.3-2)
Package: gcc
Version: 3:3.3-2
^^^
I was having a hell of a time recently trying to compile 2.4.20 (machine's
been flaking since an upgrade to 2.4.21) which fails under GCC3.3. So I tried
compiling under 2.95 which was... 3.3.
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-13
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: par2
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Peter Brian Clements [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://parchive.sorceforge.net/
* License : (GPL)
Description : Parity Archive
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 09:57:44AM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
An alternative is wu-ftpd. It would be rather foolish to support wu-ftpd
100%, however, it has almost the same status as sendmail - it is a very
well tested and greatly improved software, for years now.
You're right, it has the
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 3:56:02 PM, Richard wrote:
Did you *ever* even *attempt* to read the FHS? It took me less time
for me to find this than it did for you to whine about not having a
specific cite.
Did anyone else who were quoting from it? All of them did the same thing
I did,
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 07:36:19PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
What do people think about the art?
Pretty nice. The more important question is, who's preordering? :)
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main
Thursday, September 16, 1999, 3:23:25 AM, Marek wrote:
How are you going to get the data on to the drive without a minimum
installation on it in the first place?
Geez (that's your favorite expression, ain't it?) - you really don't know
what backups are for.
I know what they are for.
Thursday, September 16, 1999, 10:50:57 AM, Raul wrote:
Um.. you're just not lazy enough...
# cd /usr/local/bin
# ln -s /usr/bin/perl
ln -s `which perl` /usr/local/bin/perl
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 07:39:19AM +, Marc Haber wrote:
Considering one can install a fairly robust system (FreeBSD, Debian) over
FTP/NFS in under an hour
If a broadband internet connection is available, yes. That doesn't
apply to all sites.
Who said anything about an internet
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 10:12:44PM -0400, Branden Robinson wrote:
No, I knew what the rationale was and I don't agree with it one bit. In
short, their rationale is wrong and we're repeating the mistake.
Well, I'm glad we have you around to give us the unambiguous,
unquestionable Word
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 02:43:59PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
* Steve Lamb said:
Tuesday, September 14, 1999, 2:39:46 PM, Jonathan wrote:
Tuesday, September 14, 1999, 3:14:37 PM, Federico wrote:
IMHO, /usr is what we (Debian) control, /usr/local is what I (the
sysadmin) control
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 04:04:01PM +0200, Anders Arnholm wrote:
Steve Lamb wrote:
Depends on what you have on there. If it is stuff that is easily replaced
from source, recompile. I'd backup the sources, not the programs
themselves
It's almost always faster to recreate everything
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 2:09:38 AM, Gerhard wrote:
/usr/pkg would be much better ;-)))
/var/pkg even more so. Oh, wait, that would be too close to /var/dpkg.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main
1 - 100 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
